Just a few questions I have found interesting and would like to have peoples input.

When was this "state" founded?

By Whom, and what were its borders, its capitol and major cities?

Who was the palestinian leader before Arafat?

deanhills

BinahZ wrote:

Just a few questions I have found interesting and would like to have peoples input.

When was this "state" founded?

By Whom, and what were its borders, its capitol and major cities?

Who was the palestinian leader before Arafat?

This has to be a trick question? We're probably not going to find it in Wikipedia, or are we?

Wikipedia says:

Quote:

In 135 AD, after suppressing the Bar Kochba revolt, the second major Jewish revolt against Rome since the Great Revolt, Emperor Hadrian revoked the name of the Roman "Provincia Judaea" and renamed it "Provincia Syria Palaestina", the Latin version of the Greek name and the first use of the name as an administrative unit. The name "Provincia Syria Palaestina" was later shortened to Palaestina, from which the modern, anglicized "Palestine" is derived.

The Christian Crusaders later adopted the word Palestine as well. After the fall of the crusader kingdom, Palestine was no longer an official name. The name, however, continued to be used informally for the lands on both sides of the Jordan River. The Ottoman Turks, who were non-Arabs but religious Muslims, ruled the area for 400 years (1517-1917). Under Ottoman rule, the Palestine region was attached administratively to the province of Damascus and ruled from Istanbul. The name Palestine was revived after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in World War I and applied to the territory in this region that was placed under the British Mandate for Palestine.

The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is the Arab pronunciation of the original Roman name "Palaestina".

Some other terms that have been used to refer to all or part of this area include Canaan, Greater Israel, Greater Syria, the Holy Land, Iudaea Province, Judea,[6] Israel, "Israel HaShlema", Kingdom of Israel, Kingdom of Jerusalem, Land of Israel (Eretz Yisrael or Ha'aretz), Levant, Retenu (Ancient Egyptian), Southern Syria, and Syria Palestina.

So date is probably 135 AD. It was founded initially by the Romans and then through the years changed ownership quite a number of times. Currently the debate is on whether it is Israel or Palestine. By right of having conquered the land, I would say Israel is currently the majority owner of this area.

The capitol has been mostly Jerusalem although some of the distant historic owners who conquered the area periodically had different capitol cities as a matter of convenience, but also sometimes retribution, i.e. attempting to demolish Jerusalem.

The Palestinians as we know them today had no leader before Arafat. Before Arafat arrived on the West Bank, they had a number of competing groups and leaders, and there was very little cohesion, i.e. they were not united as we know them today. Arafat was instrumental in getting them unified. Following the 6-day war Arafat was nominated by Nasser of Egypt as the leader of the Palestinians. Arafat made his way into the West Bank and promptly started with working on the concept of liberation of Palestine.

Quote:

Leader of the Palestinians
On 13 November 1966, Israel launched a major raid against the Jordanian-administered West Bank town of as-Samu, in response to a Fatah-implemented roadside bomb attack, which had killed three members of the Israeli security forces near the southern Green Line border. In the resulting skirmish, scores of Jordanian security forces were killed and 125 homes razed. This raid was one of several factors that led to the 1967 Six-Day War.[17]

The Six-Day war began when Israel launched a preemptive air strike against Egypt's air force on June 5, 1967. The war ended in Arab defeat and Israel's occupation of several Arab territories, including the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Although Nasser and his Arab allies had been defeated, Arafat and Fatah could claim a victory, in that the majority of Palestinians, who had up to that time tended to align and sympathize with individual Arab governments, now began to agree that a 'Palestinian' solution of their dilemma was indispensable.[18] Many primarily Palestinian political parties, including George Habash's Arab Nationalist Movement, Hajj Amin al-Husseini's Arab Higher Committee, the Islamic Liberation Front and several Syrian-backed groups, virtually crumbled after their sponsor governments' defeat. Barely a week after the defeat, Arafat crossed the Jordan River in disguise and entered the West Bank, where he set up recruitment centers in Hebron, the Jerusalem area and Nablus, and began attracting both fighters and financiers for his cause.[18]

At the same time, Nasser contacted Arafat through Mohammed Heikal (one of Nasser's advisers) and Arafat was declared by Nasser to be the 'leader of the Palestinians'.[19] In December, Ahmad Shukeiri resigned his post as PLO Chairman. Yahya Hammuda took his place and invited Arafat to join the organization. Fatah was allocated 33 of 105 seats of the PLO Executive Committee while 57 seats were left for several other guerrilla factions.[18]

deanhills,
thank you for a reply, interesting isnt it?
Not a "trick question exactly...but more one designed to make people think
Most people "assume" a history exist that doesnt.
I think this comes from a steady diet of media hype.

deanhills

BinahZ wrote:

I think this comes from a steady diet of media hype.

Right, and some vested interests behind the media. I was thinking about the research I did last night, and am almost certain that specialist historians would dispute a number of the facts. Possibly Palestine is even older than the 135, the name was coined at that time, and previously it was known as Judea for example. Also that Palestine could embrace much more technically than just Israel and the areas that are currently occupied by Palestinians. It could also include portions of neighbouring countries such as Syria and Jordan. I'm almost certain there has to be a book about this, would make for interesting reading. The closest I got to it, quite a number of years ago was a book called "The Source" by James Michener. I must say, I've forgotten most of it, should probably give it a re-read again. Thanks for making us think about it however. You asked some good questions.

goutha

To my knowledge, there is no state of Palestine. Right now it's an autonomous territory that aims to become a country.

I'm not very aware of what happened there before WWII.

BinahZ

Well agreed that there is no state of palestine, so the idea of a "two state solution" in recent history is a bit odd isnt it

Historically the land in question ...well...it depends on whos history you are reading. But the historical questions asked, lead to what I believe to be truth.

deanhills

BinahZ wrote:

Historically the land in question ...well...it depends on whos history you are reading. But the historical questions asked, lead to what I believe to be truth.

Whose history, and whose truth? As history of that part of the world can be debated in a million ways. It has been conquered by so many people, and has become so very complicated. The best case scenario can only be tolerance of different views. And I can't see how that would be possible either as the conflict is just so deeply imbedded.

BinahZ

deanhills wrote

Quote:

Whose history, and whose truth? As history of that part of the world can be debated in a million ways. It has been conquered by so many people, and has become so very complicated. The best case scenario can only be tolerance of different views. And I can't see how that would be possible either as the conflict is just so deeply imbedded.

Dean you seem to be contradicting your own post in your initial reply. The fact is your responses were correct. Palestinian people as we know them today are a recent invention. They come from Jordan, Egypt ( like Yasser Arafat), and multiple other arab countries.

deanhills

BinahZ wrote:

deanhills wrote

Quote:

Whose history, and whose truth? As history of that part of the world can be debated in a million ways. It has been conquered by so many people, and has become so very complicated. The best case scenario can only be tolerance of different views. And I can't see how that would be possible either as the conflict is just so deeply imbedded.

Dean you seem to be contradicting your own post in your initial reply. The fact is your responses were correct. Palestinian people as we know them today are a recent invention. They come from Jordan, Egypt ( like Yasser Arafat), and multiple other arab countries.

We were discussing your statement about going for "truth". My response was that history is too complicated for any one truth to be able to transpire. There could only be a variety of truths possible, and that the best we could hope to aspire is a tolerance of the difference versions. If we were to try and find only one truth, that could only lead to a number of wars to get to it.

slashnburn99

world war 2

not sure but something happened there because the british were stationed there to stop the German advance?

paul_indo

I believe that it is correct that the name Palestine was first used around 135 AD to describe what was previously Judea, or as we know it Israel, but that the idea of a Palestinian state and people was in fact first coined by Arrafat in the 60's.

This whole current idea of a displaced people, the Palestinians, is a total fabrication, which western politicians seem happy to go along with.

ajitha999

world war 2

not sure but something happened there because the british were stationed there to stop the German advance
so nice